Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.95.1a is out! (12/10/21); Blog post: Hyperspace Topography (10/12/22)

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]

Author Topic: Yet another economy suggestion (long)  (Read 6030 times)

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3657
    • View Profile
Re: Yet another economy suggestion (long)
« Reply #60 on: October 19, 2019, 04:24:57 AM »

Making Starsector a trade game doesn't mean changing the game so that trade is profitable, if it's boring. Or, perhaps, it wouldn't be a good trading game, and what's the point of aiming for mediocrity? I have already said that, since something on the scale of X series isn't happening, instead it should be made dangerous via what we already have: combat. Have open market trading be safer initially, but leading to pirates and your enemies coming after you. Have black market trading be riskier by requiring more stealth and have a higher risk of the faction you're harming coming after you. Have advanced resources be gated behind faction reputation, commander reputation or some random quests. If this was done, open and black markets would become more distinct, too: trade for lower margins and fight only pirates (for a time), or smuggle for loads of dosh at high risk. Currently, smuggling is nearly as safe as normal trading.

I think what I want to do at some point is have another look at the possible disruptions etc; it feels like there could be more done here content-wise. Food shortage type events, etc... plus right now the trade volumes aren't, imo, high enough - e.g. a shortage of food might only bring profit on 1000 units of it.
If only the economy was actually non-linear, so that shortages on bigger colonies actually required more resources to be satisfied, instead of being non-linear only when it's inconvenient to the player...

bobucles

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
    • View Profile
Re: Yet another economy suggestion (long)
« Reply #61 on: October 19, 2019, 06:04:23 AM »

Quote
Trade is impossible!
Trade is quite possible
Quote
How are we meant to survive in the cold darkness of space without trade?!
Just trade, ya dork
Quote
Pull the plug! No one should have to suffer the broken hopes and dreams of being a trader!
How did this thread end up with 4 pages?

AlucardNoirsFolly

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
Re: Yet another economy suggestion (long)
« Reply #62 on: October 19, 2019, 06:13:59 AM »

How did this thread end up with 4 pages?

With geeks like you protesting too much about any possible change to the current trade system. Also, here is an interesting video in suport of SCC's position to make trade more dangerous if it stays in the game - which I no longer think it should.
Logged

DatonKallandor

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 717
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Yet another economy suggestion (long)
« Reply #63 on: October 20, 2019, 04:35:12 AM »

With geeks like you protesting too much about any possible change to the current trade system. Also, here is an interesting video in suport of SCC's position to make trade more dangerous if it stays in the game - which I no longer think it should.

Oh boy, maybe don't try to support your points with videos about a known scam/nightmarish hellhole of "game design".

Tariffs smaller than the current 30% (Nexerelin uses 18% normally, 9% for free ports) would still fulfill this goal, while not rendering open trade unprofitable even in cases where the design says it should be, such as cases where the the loss to tariffs exceeds surplus/deficit price effects (with 30% tariffs on both ends, you need an 85.7% markup to break even).

If combined with reduced price volatility (since huge price differences are no longer needed to make disruption event trading profitable), this would also fix smuggling being excessively profitable.

It would also throw a bone to non-traders, especially newbies who don't know they're 'meant' to use the black market, when buying things they need and selling vendor trash on the open market.

But that's exactly what the tariffs are supposed to avoid. You are not supposed to be profitable in cases where there isn't a shortage/excess situation on the open market, and reducing the value of smuggling is making the actually intended version of trade less good. You are proposing making boring trade more profitable while making interesting trade less profitable.

For the "newbies". You know what lesson that will teach them? To trade on the open market. Exactly what the design is supposed to not do.

How is this thread even still open?
« Last Edit: October 20, 2019, 04:39:23 AM by DatonKallandor »
Logged

Mordodrukow

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 273
    • View Profile
Re: Yet another economy suggestion (long)
« Reply #64 on: October 20, 2019, 07:06:46 AM »

In Space Rangers there were some settings when you start new game. One of them was "price volatility".

May be just add a setting to change tariffs here to calm down the vampire guy?
Logged
Spoiler
[close]

AlucardNoirsFolly

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
Re: Yet another economy suggestion (long)
« Reply #65 on: October 20, 2019, 09:41:18 AM »

With geeks like you protesting too much about any possible change to the current trade system. Also, here is an interesting video in suport of SCC's position to make trade more dangerous if it stays in the game - which I no longer think it should.

Oh boy, maybe don't try to support your points with videos about a known scam/nightmarish hellhole of "game design".


Firstly, I'm not supporting my point, I'm supporting SCC.s. Secondly, while you're most likely right the reason the guy in the video gives for enjoying trading is exactly what SCC wants in Starsector to spice legal trading should it be made profitable. He enjoys trading in Star Citizen because of the inherent risk associated with trading, especially high value trading.
Logged

Mr. Nobody

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 236
    • View Profile
Re: Yet another economy suggestion (long)
« Reply #66 on: October 20, 2019, 09:53:33 AM »

especially high value trading.

You mean like smuggling?
Or procurement missions?
Logged
On the left half of the Bell curve

Q8

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 42
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Yet another economy suggestion (long)
« Reply #67 on: October 20, 2019, 10:31:57 AM »

@Histidine
Dude, if u think that 18% and 9% tariffs are better, then play Nexerelin. Whats the problem?

This whole topic went over the cuckoo's nest on the page one.
...Tariffs are fine.
If i want to offload crap looted from wherever without reputation hit, i sell it for whatever on the first dock i anchor.
If i want to earn, i sell on the black market, and take a hit to the reputation.
And if i want both, i go dark and work it, witch is not easy, without the sensors perk. Or i go and sell to pirates, that is easier, but may upgrade their ***.
...Tarifs are fine.
Lowering tariffs will only make the game shorter, and the game is short enough as it is. Short to the point, that Alex prolonged it by upping the prices on buildings himself, just for that reason... ye, I better stop here, before ill go into another rant about building prices....
Logged

FooF

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Yet another economy suggestion (long)
« Reply #68 on: October 20, 2019, 03:30:15 PM »

@Alex

I've never quite understood why there isn't granularity when it comes to tariffs. Why is it a monolithic 30% across all factions? It would seem like this would be an opportunity to create faction diversity raising/lowering tariff amounts due to faction doctrine, affinity/reputation with a faction, etc. For example, what if Tri-Tach routinely had better open market offerings but the highest tariffs among the factions but the Luddic Church had the lowest tariffs but, generally speaking, didn't sell much of value? Or do you feel people would just find the most efficient route and it would undermine the whole idea?

Likewise, your own colonies could have adjustable tariffs that affect market accessibility. If you lower tariffs, you gain accessibility at the expense of profits and vice versa. I'm not sure if that just becomes a wash in the end (or if the economy would support cornering a particular commodity and then raising prices) but it seems like an avenue of meaningful choice.
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1652
    • View Profile
Re: Yet another economy suggestion (long)
« Reply #69 on: October 20, 2019, 09:19:06 PM »

I've never quite understood why there isn't granularity when it comes to tariffs. Why is it a monolithic 30% across all factions?

Because it removes knowledge barriers to trading and produces a consistent and easily transferable way to read prices. No extra UI is necessary etc.

Plus granularity of tariffs doesnt do anything except make some trade routes more profitable in a predictable way and produce bias for open market salvage sales. Neither of which has a lot of value for the core gameplay cycle
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]